Coronavirus
- This topic has 1,592 replies, 41 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
“Re: common sense …Some find the possibility of socialism so outrageous to common sense that, after becoming acquainted with our case, they opt rather to be flat-earthers, and join those instead! :/”
Thomas, that sounds like me…
Promoting class awareness in faith based communities is thwart with divisions and schisms of all kinds. You will be surprised how many are keen to consider it…
However, we need to have consistent messaging in the social discourse that evidence based science is adhered to during this pandemic- there are enough schisms as it is.
Wez I hear you- bioethics is the engine room that tells us not just what the science is: but regulates its use (a philosophy of science if you will).
I do not think one person here is against science- that is the practitioner of science… just the coagulation of wealth it generates in the form of mass profits.
From your resident flat earther,
🙂Just to ask about the alternative to the more common Western produced vaccines being used.
The Chinese have two, one made by Sinopharm and another called Coronavac by Sinovac.
Then there are the Russians with their Sputnik V
Are they being offered patent-free or is intellectual ownership still claimed?
I don’t think common sense is about holding ideas. It’s about practice, what you do or don’t do to deal with some situation, based on past practical experience. It could almost be said to the opposite of ideology and book-learning.
Socialism can be described as common sense as it’s the obvious practical solution to the problem of how to ensure that everybody’s material needs are met. The resources are there, the knowledge is there, and the people to apply it are there, so why not bring them all together with the people applying their knowledge to use the resources to produce directly to meet their needs?
There is no way, by contrast, that capitalism can be said to be common sense. Who would have thought up a system under which resources are privately owned and most people’s needs only met indirectly via money obtained from working for those who own the resources? It works after a fashion but can hardly be called common sense.
Wez, I didn’t think my hostility to Feyerabend could be based just on your description of his view, so I checked with my collection of Skeptical Inquirers and found that in 1997 I would have read and absorbed the criticism of him in an article in the March/April issue entitled “The End of Science?“, by Theodore schick Jr in which he wrote:
“There is a view abroad in the land that science is more of an ideology than a methodology, and thus that it cannot legitimately claim to have a corner on reality. No one expresses this view more pugnaciously than the late philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend (…) In Feyerabend’s view, science is a religion, for it rests on certain dogmas that cannot be rationally justified. Thus, accepting it requires a leap of faith. But just as government has no business teaching religion in the public schools, it has no business teaching science either. In a truly democratic society, people would be as free to choose their epistemology as their political party. (…) Scientists are a philosophically naive lot. But this naiveté does not come without a price. Because most scientists can’t justify their methodology, Feyerabend’s claims have gone largely unanswered. As a result, Feyerabend’s position has become prominent in both academia and the public at large. This has arguably led not only to the rise of pseudoscience and religious fundamentalism, but also to a shrinking pool of scientific jobs and research funds.”
Obviously we can have nothing to do with a view which provides an intellectual justification for pseudoscience by putting it on a par with science. However, during the next lockdown, I might add him to my reading list alongside Piers Corbyn and David Icke.
Forum rules
Your use of the forums indicates your agreement to abide by these rules, to abide by the decisions of the moderators in interpreting and enforcing these rules.1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.
‘This has arguably led not only to the rise of pseudoscience and religious fundamentalism, but also to a shrinking pool of scientific jobs and research funds.”
‘Obviously we can have nothing to do with a view which provides an intellectual justification for pseudoscience by putting it on a par with science. However, during the next lockdown, I might add him to my reading list alongside Piers Corbyn and David Icke.’
What a tragedy that to blacken the name of somebody with whom you disagree you force him into the company of the likes of ‘David Icke’! People are not responsible for the misuse of their ideas after their death – look at Marx. Anyway we’ll have to start a new thread if anyone wants to continue the debate.
Israel delays vaccine for ICU medical staff in Gaza.
The “request is still being processed”
I just saw the BBC Panorama programme on vaccine disinformation.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000scy8/panorama-vaccines-the-disinformation-warIt was quite hard to watch, for two reasons. First, the utter psychopathic ruthlessness of some antivax propagandists who put out well-produced and plausible-sounding videos featuring apparently bona-fide scientists and medical experts (although one of these was listed as a homeopath). I know what our position on censorship is, but as far as I’m concerned these individuals are actively trying to kill people, either to amass ‘likes’, a tactic which doesn’t work anyway because the videos eventually – and I’m glad to say – get pulled, or through some twisted sense of self-gratification.
Second, the lack of basic science awareness, which is to say, a reasonable idea of what science can do and what it can’t do. If people had a sense of scientific bearings, these propagandists would never have anywhere near their level of success. What’s even worse is the learned helplessness. People on the programme despair about how they don’t have ‘the right information’ about vaccines, yet have no conception that it is in their power to find this information out for themselves. They are used to being spoon-fed, and now are panicking because they don’t trust what’s on the spoon.
Depressing stuff, in a way. But Panorama were quite selective about who they interviewed, choosing only among the ‘don’t knows’. There must be a lot of workers out there who are a lot more proactive and on the ball than this sorry lot. At least I hope so.
I know that the anti-vaxxer militants are either nutty or nasty or both but is their misinformation having any effect? The case for allowing them to express their views is that they can be refuted and people judge for themselves. Hence no need to ban or censor them.
It seems that they are having little or no effect. This from a couple of days ago:
“Uptake has surpassed expectations, officials said. Infectious-disease analysts anticipated 75 percent participation, said Simon Stevens, the chief executive of NHS England. But uptake among those 70 and older has been almost 90 percent, Health Secretary Matt Hancock said Monday. Among people ages 75 to 79, he told the BBC, “over 97 percent have taken up the offer.”
The anti-vaxxers are not being listened to. They are not influencing people. Of course it could be that people aged 75 to 79 are particularly perspicacious compared with younger age groups. We’ll see.
Paddy, it’s not just “likes” they’re after, it’s cash. David Icke’s estimated net worth is $2million, lots of the anti vaxxers, nut job Qanon misleaders, etc. have a nice little side line in peddling books, videos, subscriptions and other tat.
‘The anti-vaxxers are not being listened to.’
You’d hope that’s so, but I’m not so sure. As of December a third of Britons didn’t want the jab. ‘The primary concerns of people reticent [sic] to take a jab is that it will not be safe (48 per cent), effective (47 per cent) or could have side effects (55 per cent) – https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-vaccine-coronavirus-poll-b1766767.html
Anti-vaxxers are never going to be listened to by people like us. But for this third, it could be quite a different story. Even taking your more recent statistic, that’s still a quarter of the population who are not on board.
One other point Panorama makes, which bears on the question whether to ban such videos, is that social media platforms are overrun with disinformation and that neither they nor official medical authorities are doing anything like enough to combat it.
Our position against censorship presupposes that both sides have a fair and equal say in open court. This is very far from being the case in social media, where bubbles shut out unwanted opposing views and fake news can proliferate unchallenged.
The proof of the pudding will be in the eating. We will see what the uptake is in younger (than 70) age groups. I was worried about side effects but that didn’t stop me having the jab in the end. I am sure that will be the case with others. What’s the next group? The 60 to 69s and then the 50 to 59s. If the vaccination programme goes to plan we should know by April whether the anti-vaxxers are being ignored.
The irrationalists have just won a surprising victory in the Netherland. The courts there have ordered the government to lift the nighttime curfew.
“Even the group that brought the case to court, Virus Truth, seemed surprised by its success. I recently interviewed its Covid-sceptic founder, Willem Engel, in his Rotterdam dance studio. He and his followers are adamant governments around the world are using efforts to control the spread of Covid-19 as a guise to gain control of citizens.”
I think there has been evidence that when anti-vaxxers campaigned locally, the number of cases of measles rose.
I think the importance of Andrew Wakefield to the anti-vaxxers is reflected in how much he is still being paid also demonstrates that anti-science does exercise influence.
Whether they should be legally suppressed from expressing their “advice” is something i would not say would be successful.
What is more effective is exclusion from school and nurseries and play-groups if a child is not vaccinated.
And what will be effective to many adults is the talk of introducing vaccination “passports”, (something i recall we discussed quite some time ago on this forum). No vaccination, no vacation.
But in my experience, in the USA, the more conservative minded are not known for their out-of-state trips much less foreign travel
Is vitamin D the panacea this article claims? Not so much anti-vaxxer but reflecting Wez’s concern on the bias of science.
Why politicians and doctors keep ignoring the medical research on Vitamin D and Covid
Off the top of my head it may explain why many poor nations in the tropics and semi-tropics have not recorded the same high number of covid cases.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.